Valodas kļūdas svešvalodu apguves procesā: studentu pieredzes atspoguļojums

Abstract

Simultaneous learning, usage, convergence, and overlapping of a foreign language is a contemporary feature. In this process, anyone can be a language teacher and everything can serve as a teaching aid. It is not about acquiring a foreign language, but about acquiring it through any appropriate situation and material. People’s attitudes towards foreign language errors and their understanding of what it means to know a foreign language are changing categories that are currently affected by the increasingly widespread idea of plurilingualism. The aim of the research is to find out students’ linguistic attitude towards mistakes in the process of foreign language acquisition and language usage in practice. There are two types of errors in language acquisition: 1) accidental errors due to the influence of an interlanguage, which are fully within the competence of the learner at the time but this competence does not meet the standards of the target language yet; 2) performance errors when the language user is unable to exercise his/her competence adequately (EKPVA 2006, 136). These two types are not separated in Latvian linguodidactics, and there is just one term linguistic error. On the other hand, the English scientific literature distinguishes between error for random error and mistake for performance error. The research was carried out in 2018 and 2019 by interviewing 253 students of different nationalities and specialties from Liepaja, Ventspils and Riga. The survey (which went beyond the scope of this article) dealt with a number of questions regarding the language errors in the process of a foreign language acquisition and usage. - Have you asked a teacher or someone whose mother tongue is the language you are learning to correct your mistake when noticed? More than 76 % of respondents gave an affirmative answer to this question. - Should the teacher correct the mistakes of the learner in the language acquisition process? Almost 97 % of the responses to this question were positive. - Which correction of a mistake (teacher instruction, group mates’ reprimand, individual reprimand in real communication) is better remembered? More than 68 % of respondents believe that individual criticism in the real communication process is remembered better, only slightly more than a third of the respondents consider teacher’s instruction as more durable in the learning process. - Which mistakes (pronunciation, vocabulary, or grammar) do you think cause more confusion when communicating in a foreign language? 41 % of respondents believe that the most misunderstanding in communication is due to ignorance of vocabulary. Pronunciation errors and grammatical inaccuracies are considered less significant. Respondents answered this question mainly by combining answers. - Do you think that errors in the usage of a foreign language can disappear by themselves as knowledge and language usage practice increase? More than 82 % of the responses were positive. - How do you feel when a language teacher or some other foreign language person corrects what you have said or read aloud? The responses show that the majority of respondents perceive reprimand as normal and consider it a natural part of the language acquisition process. Only some respondents think that it is wrong to correct language mistakes. The study shows that students’ linguistic attitudes towards language errors are generally neutral and positive. The combination of answers and the comments made by the respondents have proved to be informative valuable, showing not only their personal experience but also the actual picture of foreign language acquisition: real language usage is the way to qualitative language acquisition.